2005

[Portia]

As it is, we have gotten away with giving plenty of game time to 4 new players, and also currently sit 2nd on the ladder with 3 rounds remaining. Wakes is working fine in that backline at the moment.

When he is well-supported and is not under pressure, Wakelin is one of the best performed fullbacks in the league. Is this a luxury we will have in finals?

 

[Eago77]

So when did that become all that was required to be the Port Adelaide fullback?

Now you see, I disagree entirely. Bishop has been our second best tall defender this year, so why is it Wakelin that is hanging around in your scheme? I'm pretty sure I saw Bishop beat his man one-on-one on the weekend. I wish I could say the same for Wakes.

Nothing is wrong with earning a spot, but still being a rookie at age 23 is not exactly practical in the AFL. How many top flight years are we likely to get out of Thurstans compared to a 20 year old with the same AFL experience?

What would be silly would be playing Wakelin for another year or two, dropping him and Bish and then discovering our backups have no experience. How is that better?

I agree, we definitely missed Paxman early. Luckily Chad stepped up and Wilson has played most games.

Precisely why we need to give it to our young defenders instead of hoping they'll be able to step up later.

Right now, if Wakelin gets another Bickley in round 22, who steps in?

Porthos, all you points are valid, i just think you are taking things to an extreme.

Wakes is the best FB we've got, that's why he plays there. For mine the Bish is often beaten and is not a strong defender, he would get killed by most FF in the league. Thrust i see similar to Bishop as a 3rd tall, if introducing youngster is your go then he is more easily replaced. Chaplin &/or Pettigrew may play FB in time but they need to be blooded elsewhere for a while before they are thrown onto a Hall or Llyod.

Choco has done a good job in blooding some youngsters and lifting previous fringe players into the first 18/22 this year. Is it by luck or good management, well i'm not sure, obviously the injuries have forced him to, hopefully he will learn that it's a good idea to play youngster and give fringe players a real go.

 

[Eago77]

When he is well-supported and is not under pressure, Wakelin is one of the best performed fullbacks in the league. Is this a luxury we will have in finals?

Wakelin cant be blamed for our poor finals record. As long as the back half is kept intact i have confidence in it as a whole. If we get injuries to the back half, of course we will struggle to cover them.

 

[Portia]

Yeah, but I'm not talking about injuries, I'm talking about our other defenders having to seriously concentrate on stopping their own opponents, meaning Wakelin will need to be responsible for his.

 

[Portia]

Wakes is the best FB we've got, that's why he plays there. For mine the Bish is often beaten and is not a strong defender, he would get killed by most FF in the league. Thrust i see similar to Bishop as a 3rd tall, if introducing youngster is your go then he is more easily replaced.

Of course, that wouldn't be rewarding form. Also I'm pretty sure Bishop has done jobs on decent FFs in the past.

Chaplin &/or Pettigrew may play FB in time but they need to be blooded elsewhere for a while before they are thrown onto a Hall or Llyod.

Conveniently we have three games coming up against bottom eight sides. Of course these are important games, as are the games early in the season to set us up, and the middle of the season to consolidate our position in the eight. So we're left to wait for injuries to tell us the right time...but is it the right time?

Is it better that we wait until we desperately need a ruckman to promote Ackland for experience, or should we reward good SANFL form? Same with Wakelin over the young blokes early this year.

At the moment we very much wait until the decision is made for us, and thus if it is good list development its purely by chance. I don't think thats very good planning, myself.

The last player that I can think of that genuinely displaced a senior player to get in would've been Nick Stevens in 1998.

Choco has done a good job in blooding some youngsters and lifting previous fringe players into the first 18/22 this year. Is it by luck or good management, well i'm not sure, obviously the injuries have forced him to, hopefully he will learn that it's a good idea to play youngster and give fringe players a real go.

Yeah, its injuries.

 

[Eago77]

Yeah, but I'm not talking about injuries, I'm talking about our other defenders having to seriously concentrate on stopping their own opponents, meaning Wakelin will need to be responsible for his.

Given a full list to pick from Wakes is our best FB, FULL STOP! The defence plays well together, why chuck Thrust or Pettigrew down there at this stage just incase someone does a Bickley to him??

Porthos it's a team game, everyone covers another persons opponent from time to time, it's called team work. Wakes &co work well together. Without being harsh, i'd imagine you'd rather a team that might win a premiership in 5 years rather than one that could win it this year.

I love seeing youngsters given a chance, i'm a huge wrap for playing White. I wanted to see more of Ebert last year & this year (instaed of Dew this year). I agree with playing Thrust. Seeing Surjan, Pettigrew & Chaplin play this year is probably a good thing but there is a time and a place.

 

[Eago77]

Is it better that we wait until we desperately need a ruckman to promote Ackland for experience, or should we reward good SANFL form? Same with Wakelin over the young blokes early this year.

Who is in good SANFL that isn't getting a game??? Hassan? There's no one else. White has forced Choco (eventually) to giving him a game.

 

[portentous]

What happens then when Wangas,Monty, Dimma and Wakes all retire close together? We have to give some of the youngers guys a go or we'll be totally stuft in the future.Not all of them at once, but we need to gradually introduce youth into our aging backline.

 

[Portia]

Given a full list to pick from Wakes is our best FB, FULL STOP! The defence plays well together, why chuck Thrust or Pettigrew down there at this stage just incase someone does a Bickley to him??

First of all, I didn't say drop Wakelin right now. But the question is still valid - for yet another year, we've done nothing to give our backup tall defenders enough experience in case of injury. When do they get it? When Wakelin retires? Certainly poor form hasn't seen him go.

Porthos it's a team game, everyone covers another persons opponent from time to time, it's called team work. Wakes &co work well together. Without being harsh, i'd imagine you'd rather a team that might win a premiership in 5 years rather than one that could win it this year.

On the contrary, I would prefer a club that could compete for the premiership in all 5 years over one that can compete for two and then will need to take a couple of years off with a new list developing.

I love seeing youngsters given a chance, i'm a huge wrap for playing White. I wanted to see more of Ebert last year & this year (instaed of Dew this year). I agree with playing Thrust. Seeing Surjan, Pettigrew & Chaplin play this year is probably a good thing but there is a time and a place.

Cool. When is it?

 

[Eago77]

What happens then when Wangas,Monty, Dimma and Wakes all retire close together? We have to give some of the youngers guys a go or we'll be totally stuft in the future.Not all of them at once, but we need to gradually introduce youth into our aging backline.

Hence Dimma will go at the end of this year. Pax went last year. Gav isn't playing down back as much this year, nor is Dimma for that matter. Monty and Wakes will be replaced in due course but next season is probably a little soon.

 

[Portia]

Who is in good SANFL that isn't getting a game??? Hassan? There's no one else. White has forced Choco (eventually) to giving him a game.

I'm pretty sure a couple of weeks ago Ackers was BOG, now Champion is looking good...at various stages this year, various players in the SANFL have looked the goods but not been promoted. Meanwhile, we have carried blokes because Choco wants to give them a billion goes to get back into form, when as you have pointed out previously, the players that are doing the best are the ones that get kicked in the arse regularly.

 

[Eago77]

Cool. When is it?

Early next year perhaps. Ask Choco!


My point is you cant blood a whole team at the same time. Two or three players a year is more than ample. It's a hard balancing act and i reckon we've done it pretty well in the past. Same hard decisions were made last year, they'll be made again when needed. Have faith Porthos, have faith!

 

[Eago77]

I'm pretty sure a couple of weeks ago Ackers was BOG, now Champion is looking good...at various stages this year, various players in the SANFL have looked the goods but not been promoted. Meanwhile, we have carried blokes because Choco wants to give them a billion goes to get back into form, when as you have pointed out previously, the players that are doing the best are the ones that get kicked in the arse regularly.

Acklands injured and if he wasn't he would have played against Melb and probably this week & next. His form has been ok, but you wouldn't play him infront of any of the talls currently in the team, no matter their ages.

Champion has played two half decent games in the SANFL for his career, a little bit more is required before i'd even consider him half a chance at AFL level.

 

[rfctigerarmy]

How do you sleep at night?

I dont

 

[Macca19]

How many more new players can we introduce while still hoping to be in the top 2 or 4? [/b]

Well we wont have a choice in the next few years and thats the problem. If he takes the Thurstans route with a lot of our other youngsters then we are going to be in a lot of trouble.

1 - PRIMUS 30
2 - WAKELIN 30
3 - MONTGOMERY 31
4 - WANGANEEN Gavin31
6 - SCHOFIELD 30
10 - FRANCOU Josh30
11 - HARDWICK 32
19 - BISHOP 29
21 - WILSON 28
29 - KINGSLEY 29
38 - JAMES 29

Thats a fair chunk of our first team that has to replaced in 1-2 years time. If we arent careful we will end up with a bunch of old guys and a bunch of rookies with no middle ground.

I think if Choco had chosen this year to experiment with youngies in the backlines (and remember, the whole Chad experiment was exactly that for the first half of the season), it would have been too much too soon.

In the end he wasnt given the choice anyway as Gilham has missed basically the entire season, Chaplin about 3 months and Pettigrew about 3 months.

Wakes is working fine in that backline at the moment.

I'd have to disagree there. Hes barely won a 1-1 contest all year, has really struggled against a lot of players this year and the signs have been there. He wont be able to rely on other players helping out in the finals as his teammates will have their own problems to deal with against the top sides. Can you really see him playing a match winning role on a Neitz/Lynch/Lloyd/Hall in the finals?

Just for the record hes had 39 goals kicked on him in 17 games this year. In comparison, Bishop has had 26 goals kicked on him in 18 games.

 

[Portia]

My point is you cant blood a whole team at the same time. Two or three players a year is more than ample.

So then each of those players has to be up to playing for seven years, by my reckoning.

Also, I don't think anyone has called for blooding a whole team at the same time, while we're accusing each other of extremes.

It's a hard balancing act and i reckon we've done it pretty well in the past. Same hard decisions were made last year, they'll be made again when needed. Have faith Porthos, have faith!

Thing is, I don't reckon we've done it pretty well, I think we've just been able to get away with it for now.

 

[Portia]

Acklands injured and if he wasn't he would have played against Melb and probably this week & next. His form has been ok, but you wouldn't play him infront of any of the talls currently in the team, no matter their ages.

Champion has played two half decent games in the SANFL for his career, a little bit more is required before i'd even consider him half a chance at AFL level.

I had a really awesome response to this post, and lost it due to a faulty internet connection. AARGH. I will summarise or go in a different direction.

Great reasons for Ackland and Champion not playing - both tried and true. However at the end of the year, they still won't have played, a bunch of other players won't have played and our defence will be another year older.

Our player development seems to be left up to fate...you will only get into the side in the event of injuries or a Choco non-fave hitting poor form. This is not planned development, so why are we happy to let it happen?

Essendon are an example of how to keep your list healthy, by introducing significant new players into the side after trading away old non-essential players that show no real signs of improvement. Caracella, Blumfield, Heffernan, Hardwick. All replaced as part of a good unit.

The Australian test cricket selectors use Choco's policy, but they are in a very different environment. #1 they have clearly the best group to select from and #2 it is a bitch for players to move to another team.

On Wakelin being clearly better than the other options....Ian Healy was clearly Australia's best and most proven wicket keeper until they finally gave Gilchrist a go.

The cricket selectors at least are aware of their weaknesses, and when they let someone go, it is usually abrupt. Trading or delisting Wakelin would be an abrupt move, but it would also be the only way the young defenders that we have invested so much player capital into will get a real go with our current selection criteria.

If we had a genuinely form based selection method, I would be all for keeping Wakes on the list as a filler. We do not, have not, and have no reason to expect to suddenly have one.

 

[ClintEastwood]

So then each of those players has to be up to playing for seven years, by my reckoning.

Also, I don't think anyone has called for blooding a whole team at the same time, while we're accusing each other of extremes.

Thing is, I don't reckon we've done it pretty well, I think we've just been able to get away with it for now.

You are arguing that it's ok to give more new players significant game time in one year than we have done this year. This year it has been Thrust, Ebo, White, and Surjan. You could almost include Dom. Let's say there have been 4 newies. I agree with Eago that more than that is probably pushing fate. I'm sure though, that we are just arguing over a number Porthos - you too would agree that you can only play so many 'newies' in a year. So how many would be too many?

 

[PAfolwr]

Acklands injured and if he wasn't he would have played against Melb and probably this week & next. His form has been ok, but you wouldn't play him infront of any of the talls currently in the team, no matter their ages.
...

Had Ackland been fit he probably would have got a game instead of White.

 

[ClintEastwood]

Had Ackland been fit he probably would have got a game instead of White.

I doubt that. I think he's shown enough to have earnt the chance he got yesterday. And I believe Williams would think the same.

 

[PAfolwr]

I doubt that. I think he's shown enough to have earnt the chance he got yesterday. And I believe Williams would think the same.

IMO White is not picked not because of what he can or cannot do, but our strategy this year revolves around Tredrea and a resting ruckman and or a versatile tall. White is neither.

 

[ClintEastwood]

IMO White is not picked not because of what he can or cannot do

I don't follow you. Why do you think he is picked?

 

[Portia]

You are arguing that it's ok to give more new players significant game time in one year than we have done this year. This year it has been Thrust, Ebo, White, and Surjan. You could almost include Dom. Let's say there have been 4 newies. I agree with Eago that more than that is probably pushing fate. I'm sure though, that we are just arguing over a number Porthos - you too would agree that you can only play so many 'newies' in a year. So how many would be too many?

Depends on whether they play the whole season or not. Between those four they've filled maybe two slots in the 22 between them over the season?

Its also worth noting that none of those players have played in the area of our side that is the oldest and most in need of imminent replacement.

We have what will be a big weakness coming up, and we're not setting up to prepare for it. Why does this not concern you?

 

[PAfolwr]

I don't follow you. Why do you think he is picked?

Wrong version of not picked.
In other words he doesn't get picked because .....
not because he has major flaws.

 

[portentous]

Wrong version of not picked.
In other words he doesn't get picked because .....
not because he has major flaws.

You've lost me......